NEW GENERAL FREE AGENCY/TRADE THREAD
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 123, 124, 125 ... 190, 191, 192  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
32
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 69925

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 9:34 am    Post subject:

Laker's Fan wrote:
In the nine years under her executive leadership, we have one title, one play-in/1st round exit, and seven trips to Cancun.


And her brother was in charge of basketball operations for half those years. Be grateful she fired him or there would be no titles.
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 141389
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 10:06 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
pjiddy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
If Lakers want 2023 cap flexibility while being competitive now (assuming no Nets trade), you trade for Bev/Beasley/Bogs/Gay for Russ/THT/1sts. That way those players expire (Beasley is a team option and Gay can be stretched or traded if needed) and you have your 33m plus (and if LBJ takes a haircut) a max slot. Not that there are any great FAs in 2023 who are younger than 30.



So we’re trading our two firsts to convert expirings into different expirings?

What do you think our ceiling is with those guys?

I see first round exit at best and now we’re out our last good assets.


It’s noting how the Lakers are neither going all in or rebuilding. I hate that position but it seems they want to win now, and have 2023 cap space. Insane.


2003 isn’t about cap space, it is about the repeater luxury tax.
_________________
Between the things known, and the things unknown, are the Doors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 141389
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 10:15 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
J.C. Smith wrote:
If the Lakers truly hadn't offered a second first rounder for Kyrie then they probably made a mistake. If they did and it still didn't get done, they can wait around a bit until its closer to camp and see if New Jersey folds or if they trade Durant and then get Kyrie. Obviously if you can limit it to one first there that is great because you can package the other with THT and acquire another piece. But I see it as a near 0% chance that the Lakers start the season with Westbrook in purple and gold. And if they do, I'm going to seriously question their decision making.


I wouldn't put a specific percentage on it. We don't have enough information to do it. I think it's north of 50%, though. I've questioned the decision making for a long time (before it was trendy, in fact). I'm actually less critical right now because I don't know what is really possible. I'm not even 100% sure that the Turner/Hield deal was truly on the table. Also, I can see how all of this is complicated by the repeater tax issue. Does Jeanie really want to pay repeater tax so that we can put a Band-Aid on our gunshot wound?


I would put the chances of Westbrook being a Laker at training camp at 99%. Not surprisingly, there is no market for him. And moving him after camp becomes more difficult as not many teams can take on $47 mil using 1-2 players at a point when roster spots are limited.
_________________
Between the things known, and the things unknown, are the Doors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersfever714
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 9122

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 10:16 am    Post subject:

Laker's Fan wrote:
In the nine years under her executive leadership, we have one title, one play-in/1st round exit, and seven trips to Cancun.


Cancun is like one of the cheaper vacation destinations. Frugality is in the blood.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mhan00
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 31144

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 10:34 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
pjiddy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
If Lakers want 2023 cap flexibility while being competitive now (assuming no Nets trade), you trade for Bev/Beasley/Bogs/Gay for Russ/THT/1sts. That way those players expire (Beasley is a team option and Gay can be stretched or traded if needed) and you have your 33m plus (and if LBJ takes a haircut) a max slot. Not that there are any great FAs in 2023 who are younger than 30.



So we’re trading our two firsts to convert expirings into different expirings?

What do you think our ceiling is with those guys?

I see first round exit at best and now we’re out our last good assets.


It’s noting how the Lakers are neither going all in or rebuilding. I hate that position but it seems they want to win now, and have 2023 cap space. Insane.


I don’t get how it’s an all or nothing decision RIGHT NOW for you. Why is it totally binary between go all in or blow it all up for you, and why does that decision have to be made right this very moment? There’s months until training camp. After that there’s even more months until the deadline and who knows how the landscape might change then with Russ’ contract a bit cheaper and teams getting a better idea of what their position is going to be.

For the Lakers, if Lebron and AD have stayed healthy and look amazing by the during the season, maybe it’s more palatable to push in on a more marginal deal then, too. But if one/both of them are hurt or if we are looking like a play in team at best even with both of them, how would it be better to move WB for a marginal return? We can always blow it up later if that’s the case by trading AD after Lebron goes (trading Lebron would be an insane PR disaster for the Lakers, imo, and would be insanely difficult considering his contract and his age). Or we can just let WB walk next season and sign a guy like Turner with the 20 million or so in cap space we’d have (assuming Lebron stays) since it isn’t like Turner is a high demand asset himself, and keep our picks. There’s lots of decisions that can be made. None of them are very good and none are clear winners, including trading both picks RIGHT NOW for “meh” returns.

Lakers put themselves in a horrible spot with the WB trade. They need to try to hit some home runs to dig out of it. That means trying to get distressed assets like Turner/Hield for only 1 pick and WB so they keep a pick to try to use in a separate trade to get someone else. If all we’re doing is trading WB to get from 33 wins to 40 wins, why? Both Turner and Hield played on a team that won only 25 games last season. Sure, Turner only played 42 (he was hurt the rest of the time) and Hield only got moved there at the deadline, but it’s not like the win percentage jumped a ton when he and Halliburton got there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number Reply with quote
pjiddy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 27664

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 10:35 am    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
pjiddy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
If Lakers want 2023 cap flexibility while being competitive now (assuming no Nets trade), you trade for Bev/Beasley/Bogs/Gay for Russ/THT/1sts. That way those players expire (Beasley is a team option and Gay can be stretched or traded if needed) and you have your 33m plus (and if LBJ takes a haircut) a max slot. Not that there are any great FAs in 2023 who are younger than 30.



So we’re trading our two firsts to convert expirings into different expirings?

What do you think our ceiling is with those guys?

I see first round exit at best and now we’re out our last good assets.


It’s noting how the Lakers are neither going all in or rebuilding. I hate that position but it seems they want to win now, and have 2023 cap space. Insane.


2003 isn’t about cap space, it is about the repeater luxury tax.


If that’s the priority, then simply let Russ and THT expire. No point vanquishing the last of our assets just to turn them into expiring journeymen and maybe a handful more wins.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 3499

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:16 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
vasashi17+ wrote:
However, what’s wrong with my assumption? Lakers are trying to swap out Russ for better fitting expiring deals and are only willing to give up 1 FRP at the moment to do so. They wasting their time/energy in doing it with the likes of Ainge, Pritchard & Buford (via tagging in Spurs as a 3rd team) if they ain’t willing to either take a longterm deal and/or add that 2nd FRP. Those guys/teams in particular won’t really demand for anything less imho.


The problem with your assumption is that the Lakers are doubtlessly aware of everything you're saying. I think that they are just hoping that something falls into their lap. That's not delusional on their part.

I'm not saying that this is going to work. I'm saying that I think our front office understands the situation better than you are assuming.


You sure about that?

We all know Ainge ain’t even picking up the phone unless we surrender our entire inventory of draft picks.

I’m sure you’re aware of the history with Pritchard/Indy. Our current FO has yet to make a deal with them after they set out a 500k probe on our ass. The closest we got to getting a deal done with them is with DC taking our #22 pick and sending it to Indy in the Russ trade. In addition to the 500k, I’m certain it will cost us more than a FRP to bring in even just Buddy from them.

We’ve had our run ins with SA as well and things still remain kawhiet between us. Even with their reported taste for Kuz, they still didn’t entertain DeRozan to us. Again, the only thing that will convince them to rent out their cap space this year is for us to give up nearly everything we got…which isn’t much.

And there-in lies the problem. Our real assets are Reaves (who is an impending RFA), THT (who is an impending UFA via his PO), MaxC, ‘27/‘29 unprotected 1sts/picks swaps/SRPs. We’re limited in what we could work with, so imho it’s a waste of time dealing with folks we have bad history with.

Reports indicate we’re not willing to take on longterm deals and we’re not willing to surrender both our tradeable FRPs to dump Russ with. So clearly they’re tone deaf on the matter cause we’re only linked to opps that will drive a hard bargain with us.

I would like to see at least one report indicating that we have a Russ deal lined up where we take back longterm contracts, with the intent that we will not include any of our remaining tradeable draft capital. The only report to indicate anything of the sort is with NY/Jules…and sorry to mintz words again, but they’re F’n tone deaf, cause surprise surprise there’s clearly bad history there as well.

Fam, you have too much faith still in this FO. They don’t get it. Continuously #MarginalizingTheMargins which is why we don’t have any real assets to trade with, foolishly chasing stars when they have no ability to klose unless it’s with Klutch, in which case they overspend and can’t even duck the tax right, with waiving DAJ/Trev last year to cost ownership 14m.

I’m hoping Ky lands in our laps otherwise our title hopes are set for another nap.

Btw, I know what you’re implying but I’m so fed up with this FO, so I needed to be a dick about it which is why I vent there with my post.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
logical24
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Jun 2019
Posts: 2296

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:28 am    Post subject:

Lakers Legacy
@LakersLegacyPod
If the Lakers can swing a Cam Reddish deal separately (& I don’t even know if it would cost THT at this point) -

And still swing the Indy deal -

Myles Turner
Cam Reddish
Buddy Hield

Seems more cleaner/formidable to me than the UTA pkg.

Esp if LA knows they can get Schröder.


Dennis/Nunn/Reaves
Buddy/Lonnie/Cam
LeBron/Stanley/TBJ
AD/Weyen/JTA
Turner/Bryant/DJ

I would not be mad at that


Turner-Hield-Reddish would solve so many of our problems:
1) Spacing threats at 2 and 5 spots
2) Proven rim protection behind undersized guards/ wings
3) Young athletic forward over 6-7 for a change
4) Diverse salaries for future trades
5) AD injury-insurance on D.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 40678

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:35 am    Post subject:

Reddish + Randle for Westbrook and THT you probably don’t have to give up both of the 1st round picks I think something like that could be explored.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 27958

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:35 am    Post subject:

logical24 wrote:
I honestly could see either Nunn/2nd for Reddish or THT for Reddish straight up


I don't understand the fascination with Reddish. I'd rather have Nunn than Reddish. Reddish provides more size, but he just isn't a very good player. As of now, Nunn has the best track record as an outside shooter of any of the role players.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 21648

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:40 am    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
Reddish + Randle for Westbrook and THT you probably don’t have to give up both of the 1st round picks I think something like that could be explored.


I don't know bout this, if we gonna burn the 2023 cap space, not sure if it's for Randle unless we move Bron or AD, which I hope not. If Kyrie isn't coming then a Draymond in 2023 would be a much better fit than Randle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ThePageDude
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 1911

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:40 am    Post subject:

pjiddy wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
pjiddy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
If Lakers want 2023 cap flexibility while being competitive now (assuming no Nets trade), you trade for Bev/Beasley/Bogs/Gay for Russ/THT/1sts. That way those players expire (Beasley is a team option and Gay can be stretched or traded if needed) and you have your 33m plus (and if LBJ takes a haircut) a max slot. Not that there are any great FAs in 2023 who are younger than 30.



So we’re trading our two firsts to convert expirings into different expirings?

What do you think our ceiling is with those guys?

I see first round exit at best and now we’re out our last good assets.


It’s noting how the Lakers are neither going all in or rebuilding. I hate that position but it seems they want to win now, and have 2023 cap space. Insane.


2003 isn’t about cap space, it is about the repeater luxury tax.


If that’s the priority, then simply let Russ and THT expire. No point vanquishing the last of our assets just to turn them into expiring journeymen and maybe a handful more wins.


That may well happen.
My read is that ownership will only pay repeater tax + FRP's if it lucks into a truly worthwhile deal, read some combination of "big name", "all star", "conf. final potential"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 27958

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:44 am    Post subject:

joeblow wrote:
Last season was the opposite as we depleted our roster of almost all supporting players of legit defensive size (over 6'6" in particular) and skill. It was the worst defensive squad in the Laker Lebron era, and any deals moving forward have to consider that DEFENSE IS 50% OF THE GAME if we want to make a serious run at a title.

You can't simply outscore (on paper) everyone in the universe with a proposed roster and call it a championship team.


In a perfect world, this makes sense. In the real world of the current Laker roster, not so much. We aren't going to build a strong defensive team at this point. That is water under the bridge/spilled milk. Right now, we are grossly deficient when it comes to outside shooting unless someone like Reaves or Walker makes a huge leap. A player like Harris or Curry would fill a gaping void on the roster. It's not a choice between having an elite defense or having an elite offense. It's a choice between having a functional offense and a non-functional offense. If the offense isn't functional, the defense will not be good enough to win games.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
anth2000
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 9487
Location: Pasadena, CA

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:46 am    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
Reddish + Randle for Westbrook and THT you probably don’t have to give up both of the 1st round picks I think something like that could be explored.


No, no one wants Randle here.
He will be terrible with Lebron and Davis.
No thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
King Randle
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2014
Posts: 6267

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:53 am    Post subject:

anth2000 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Reddish + Randle for Westbrook and THT you probably don’t have to give up both of the 1st round picks I think something like that could be explored.


No, no one wants Randle here.
He will be terrible with Lebron and Davis.
No thanks!


Please speak for yourself….a lot of posters here would like him here….we could do a lot worse like going to camp with Russ.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 27958

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:07 pm    Post subject:

Laker's Fan wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Yes, that's the heart of the matter. Most of the other stuff is just distractions. Unless something falls into our lap, it comes down to a choice between (1) forcing a Westbrook trade even though it will not make us a serious contender and may hurt our ability to rebuild in the post-Lebron era, and (2) rolling with Westbrook and hoping that Ham can find a way to make it work, even though we don't expect that we will be a contender in any case. Those are lousy choices, but this is where we are.

One other thing: We shouldn't underestimate the commercial aspects. The NBA is an entertainment product, not scientific research. Jeanie is painfully aware that the Lakers need to put an attractive product on the court. Laker fans expect championships, of course. If the Lakers can't deliver a contender, they at least need to deliver a team that is fun to watch. Last year was a good illustration of what happens when the team isn't a contender AND is hard to watch.


I wouldn’t even call it post LeBron era. Imagine if we would have dealt a 1st for Wall last year. We would be marginally better this year and have one less tool to improve. Same applies to making a trade now. These are our resources to improve now, deadline and next year. The Westbrook tax isn’t done being paid and turning a frog into a prince requires great care and patience.

I agree on the commercial aspect. But from what I can see Jeanie is managing the long game. In the nine years under her executive leadership, we have one title, one play-in/1st round exit, and seven trips to Cancun. That includes having LeBron for four seasons. She can ill afford another extended run of futility with another NBA franchise in her market ready to steal market share.


Then you're looking at option (2). That's fine. In fact, I think that the odds favor it.

Actually, there a couple other wild cards in this discussion. The first is a straight buyout. Westbrook's new agent is something of a buyout specialist, so this may be what Westbrook wants to do. There is also the buyout + stretch option. I think we would need to do this before September 1, or something like that. After the Deng experience, the fanbase isn't going to like that option.

However, if we stretch Westbrook, we cease to be a taxpayer this year, and the repeater tax issue goes away. Furthermore, we would start sharing in the revenue from the taxpayers. The net effect from tax savings and tax distributions could easily be greater than the $47M or so paid to Westbrook. Given that Jeanie seems to be balking at going into repeater territory next summer, this might have less of an impact on our future plans than it appears at first glance. In other words, the $15M in dead cap for '24 and '25 may not actually affect what Jeanie is willing to do.

I'm not advocating either a buyout or a buyout + stretch. I'm just saying that these things could come into play. If you don't want Westbrook, and you don't want to give up draft picks because we still wouldn't be a contender, this is something to consider.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
anth2000
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 9487
Location: Pasadena, CA

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:07 pm    Post subject:

King Randle wrote:
anth2000 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Reddish + Randle for Westbrook and THT you probably don’t have to give up both of the 1st round picks I think something like that could be explored.


No, no one wants Randle here.
He will be terrible with Lebron and Davis.
No thanks!


Please speak for yourself….a lot of posters here would like him here….we could do a lot worse like going to camp with Russ.


Lol…from King Randle, of course you want him here.
You want to pay 4 years, $118 million still left on his contract?
He’s not that great. Able to put up good numbers on a crap team.
He doesn’t fit with Lebron and Davis.

Agree, we need to move on from Westbrook.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Trevacious2
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 14 Jun 2017
Posts: 207

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:12 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Right now, we are grossly deficient when it comes to outside shooting unless someone like Reaves or Walker makes a huge leap.

I’m also prepared to see Swider become a legend that’s true, here and now!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
King Randle
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2014
Posts: 6267

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:18 pm    Post subject:

anth2000 wrote:
King Randle wrote:
anth2000 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Reddish + Randle for Westbrook and THT you probably don’t have to give up both of the 1st round picks I think something like that could be explored.


No, no one wants Randle here.
He will be terrible with Lebron and Davis.
No thanks!


Please speak for yourself….a lot of posters here would like him here….we could do a lot worse like going to camp with Russ.


Lol…from King Randle, of course you want him here.
You want to pay 4 years, $118 million still left on his contract?
He’s not that great. Able to put up good numbers on a crap team.
He doesn’t fit with Lebron and Davis.

Agree, we need to move on from Westbrook.


Actually he does….can stretch the floor, runs like a deer, tough in the post….as a 3rd option here he would be very good….I still favor the Nets, Indy and Utah deals over NY…..in fact I don’t think NY is in play….we all have different opinions on players….I like him as a 3rd option….u don’t fair enough
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
cital
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 3480

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:22 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
Reddish + Randle for Westbrook and THT you probably don’t have to give up both of the 1st round picks I think something like that could be explored.


I don’t think I would even give up 1 first round pick in that deal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 27958

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:23 pm    Post subject:

vasashi17+ wrote:
Btw, I know what you’re implying but I’m so fed up with this FO, so I needed to be a dick about it which is why I vent there with my post.


No problem. I'll make one general comment: I don't think that it matters what teams/GMs we are dealing with. It will (and should) cost at least one first round pick to unload Westbrook and his $47M contract. It will (and should) cost at least one first round pick to get useful players in return. Whatever you think of Ainge, Pritchard, and Popovich (and you're not wrong about them), I don't think you would get a different response from any other GM.

As I said 40-50 pages ago, I like the idea of doing a Westbrook + one pick + cash for Hield trade. Hield has warts as a player, but he would fit far better than Westbrook. The Pacers have the cap room to make the deal without filler, they unload Hield's overpriced contract, and they still have Turner as a trade asset. This would cut our taxes a lot and might even make us a non-taxpayer (you're the man to answer that question). I have no idea whether the Pacers would make the deal, but I think it's a lot more viable than any of the wild trade ideas that are being kicked around here.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 27958

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:24 pm    Post subject:

Trevacious2 wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Right now, we are grossly deficient when it comes to outside shooting unless someone like Reaves or Walker makes a huge leap.

I’m also prepared to see Swider become a legend that’s true, here and now!


That would be wonderful, for sure.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
gng930
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 9711

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:38 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
vasashi17+ wrote:
Btw, I know what you’re implying but I’m so fed up with this FO, so I needed to be a dick about it which is why I vent there with my post.


No problem. I'll make one general comment: I don't think that it matters what teams/GMs we are dealing with. It will (and should) cost at least one first round pick to unload Westbrook and his $47M contract. It will (and should) cost at least one first round pick to get useful players in return. Whatever you think of Ainge, Pritchard, and Popovich (and you're not wrong about them), I don't think you would get a different response from any other GM.

As I said 40-50 pages ago, I like the idea of doing a Westbrook + one pick + cash for Hield trade. Hield has warts as a player, but he would fit far better than Westbrook. The Pacers have the cap room to make the deal without filler, they unload Hield's overpriced contract, and they still have Turner as a trade asset. This would cut our taxes a lot and might even make us a non-taxpayer (you're the man to answer that question). I have no idea whether the Pacers would make the deal, but I think it's a lot more viable than any of the wild trade ideas that are being kicked around here.


I've been advocating this too as the best non-Kyrie deal we can make. It generates a significant TPE (>25 million) and we keep at least one pick. Instead of Turner whose fit as a true center and value as a pending UFA is questionable, you could do a lot of damage with that to get that 5th closer alongside Hield and hopefully at least one of THT/Reaves.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)


Last edited by gng930 on Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
gng930
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 9711

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:41 pm    Post subject:

J.C. Smith wrote:
You guys can't expect players or fans to buy into Lakers exceptionalism if you aren't willing to make moves to try to compete. How do you expect to attract free agents after that? If your team missed the playoffs two years in a row, and Lebron is inching closer to 40?

Any idea that begins with Russell Westbrook playing in a Lakers uniform again is a bad idea. There is a reason no team wants to trade for him as a player at this point. He's a cancer, whose talent isn't high enough to justify dealing with it. The message it sends is that the Lakers are willing to waste years of their superstars. You have to make a move to try to give those guys a chance to compete or trade them and the Lakers are not willing to trade them. So the only option is to make a move.

I'm not a huge fan of the Utah deal as the parts you are getting back are too old. Maybe if they can get it at a discount but I don't view guys like Beverly or Bogs as long term solutions. Maybe if you could get a deal like that for only one first and then acquire Hield or Turner with another first round pick + THT and Nunn or something like that it becomes a decent move. But on its own it's my least favorite move other than keeping Westbrook.

I'd trade two picks for Kyrie and Harris or Curry in a heartbeat. That move gives you a legitimate chance to contend. If they can make that move they have to do it.

I'd also be fine with the Pacers deal, though they should do their best to retain one of the first round picks if possible. But that deal gets you two guys who are still in their primes and who together >> Westbrook. If all else fails you have to fight to get the best deal you can but you make the move.

A New York deal, I'm iffy on. I like Randle, but it's the riskiest move out there due to his contract and the mystery of whether you are getting All-Star Randle from two years ago, or regressed Randle from last season. It would depend on the other parts to me. Randle/Rose/Cam though I could talk myself into over the Utah move due to the age of the players involved. But it wouldn't be my first choice. For me its Nets, Pacers, Knicks/Jazz depending on pieces, in that order.

The bottom line though is that when the Lakers brought in Lebron you knew what to expect. A chance to win a title or two, and a meddling superstar who you have to cater to. He delivered a title, and now the onus is on the Lakers to put a team around him that at least gives him a chance to compete. As constructed right now, this team does not have a chance to compete. Sure you have the puncher's chance if you can get Lebron and AD into the playoffs healthy and everything clicking at the right time. But you don't have a realistic chance with the team as is. Not enough shooting, and a massive chemistry problem in Westbrook.

I could talk myself into another bad season if the Lakers were rebuilding. If they trade Lebron and AD and got some picks and young guys who you knew would take time to develop. But if your picks are going to be swapped with New Orleans, even in that scenario there is little incentive to tank. Jeanie plans on extending Lebron. That being the case you have no choice but to make some moves. And with all other teams knowing they are desperate to do so, the Lakers are going to lose those two picks. That's the cost of Lebron. So be it.

If the Lakers truly hadn't offered a second first rounder for Kyrie then they probably made a mistake. If they did and it still didn't get done, they can wait around a bit until its closer to camp and see if New Jersey folds or if they trade Durant and then get Kyrie. Obviously if you can limit it to one first there that is great because you can package the other with THT and acquire another piece. But I see it as a near 0% chance that the Lakers start the season with Westbrook in purple and gold. And if they do, I'm going to seriously question their decision making.


I think that's overstated. If Lebron is at the table with them negotiating an extension that supersedes any message you imagine they might be sending. And it's not like Lebron/AD are demanding a trade either.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 141389
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:42 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Laker's Fan wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Yes, that's the heart of the matter. Most of the other stuff is just distractions. Unless something falls into our lap, it comes down to a choice between (1) forcing a Westbrook trade even though it will not make us a serious contender and may hurt our ability to rebuild in the post-Lebron era, and (2) rolling with Westbrook and hoping that Ham can find a way to make it work, even though we don't expect that we will be a contender in any case. Those are lousy choices, but this is where we are.

One other thing: We shouldn't underestimate the commercial aspects. The NBA is an entertainment product, not scientific research. Jeanie is painfully aware that the Lakers need to put an attractive product on the court. Laker fans expect championships, of course. If the Lakers can't deliver a contender, they at least need to deliver a team that is fun to watch. Last year was a good illustration of what happens when the team isn't a contender AND is hard to watch.


I wouldn’t even call it post LeBron era. Imagine if we would have dealt a 1st for Wall last year. We would be marginally better this year and have one less tool to improve. Same applies to making a trade now. These are our resources to improve now, deadline and next year. The Westbrook tax isn’t done being paid and turning a frog into a prince requires great care and patience.

I agree on the commercial aspect. But from what I can see Jeanie is managing the long game. In the nine years under her executive leadership, we have one title, one play-in/1st round exit, and seven trips to Cancun. That includes having LeBron for four seasons. She can ill afford another extended run of futility with another NBA franchise in her market ready to steal market share.


Then you're looking at option (2). That's fine. In fact, I think that the odds favor it.

Actually, there a couple other wild cards in this discussion. The first is a straight buyout. Westbrook's new agent is something of a buyout specialist, so this may be what Westbrook wants to do. There is also the buyout + stretch option. I think we would need to do this before September 1, or something like that. After the Deng experience, the fanbase isn't going to like that option.

However, if we stretch Westbrook, we cease to be a taxpayer this year, and the repeater tax issue goes away. Furthermore, we would start sharing in the revenue from the taxpayers. The net effect from tax savings and tax distributions could easily be greater than the $47M or so paid to Westbrook. Given that Jeanie seems to be balking at going into repeater territory next summer, this might have less of an impact on our future plans than it appears at first glance. In other words, the $15M in dead cap for '24 and '25 may not actually affect what Jeanie is willing to do.

I'm not advocating either a buyout or a buyout + stretch. I'm just saying that these things could come into play. If you don't want Westbrook, and you don't want to give up draft picks because we still wouldn't be a contender, this is something to consider.


At this point stretching Westbrook doesn’t seem as ridiculous as it might have before.
_________________
Between the things known, and the things unknown, are the Doors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 123, 124, 125 ... 190, 191, 192  Next
Page 124 of 192
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB